Schedule Format

F. Stop making fricking threads, Dork.

A

quote:

---

A but with modifications. Not all teams need 3 perma rivals, some can have 2. You just need an even number of teams with 3 perma rivals and 2 perma rivals for it to work. No need to manufacture annual games for the sake of it.

Playing home and homes* with every SEC program in a 4 year period has to be a primary rule here. It’s ridiculous to go a decade without playing at a school.

---

If everyone can be happy with 3 perm, then that is the answer, I agree.

But as an example.. if Auburn, LSU, Miss State & Tennessee all list Alabama in their top 3 list of teams they want to play.. someone gets screwed in the 3 perm format. It’s the same idea as a 4 Team Playoff System vs an 8 Team Playoff System.. someone is always complaining, but the farther you go out, the less value it holds.

That is why I think the 5 Perm format might work best. You cycle through in 5 years instead of 4 years, but a lot more teams are happy in the process.

As a Texas fan, I would pick (A) but I believe we could make any schedule work. Worst case scenario, Texas OU would still be played as an OOC game that year. That won’t happen, just saying we could make any schedule work.

At this point, old rivalries be damned, just make a system that is based on geography.

So two divisions with everything west of the MS/AL line being the West and everything east being the East. NO cherrypicking or moving schools around. If you're on one side, you're on one side.

If its pods, do pods but I do think that all in state schools have to be in the same pod. So the version of not having Texas and AM in the same needs to be dismissed.

Traditions are getting killed more and more in college football, cannot hold to all of them.

quote:

---

F. Stop making fricking threads, Dork.

---

quote:

---

10 conference games

---

100% agree - That is the best solution.

3 Pod + 2 Perm + 5 Rotating = 4 year cycle

You get Pods.
You get Perms.
You get a 4 year cycle.
You get less cream puffs..

But some people will still complain..

I'd prefer four pods. Each team would play their three pod opponents every year and then have one permanent opponent from each other pod, so six permanent opponents. Go to a nine-game conference schedule and rotate the remaining three games every year (1 rotating opponent per pod), so that every team goes through the cycle of facing every team in three years.

Taking that approach would allow traditional rivalries to be maintained (AU-UGA; TX-A&M) even though the teams aren't in the same pod while also fostering new rivalries, which would be good for the sport.

Yeah, don’t think that’s going to work out. In that format, LSU would likely keep only one of AU or UA as a permanent opponent. Any preference?

quote:

---

I'd prefer four pods. Each team would play their three pod opponents every year and then have one permanent opponent from each other pod, so six permanent opponents. Go to a nine-game conference schedule and rotate the remaining three games every year (1 rotating opponent per pod), so that every team goes through the cycle of facing every team in three years.

Taking that approach would allow traditional rivalries to be maintained (AU-UGA; TX-A&M) even though the teams aren't in the same pod while also fostering new rivalries, which would be good for the sport.

---

I like this idea a lot, especially if you did it like this.

#—-1—2—3—4
A - AL AU TN VU
B - UF UG UK SC
C - OU TX AR MO
D - LA AG OM MS

Play Letter Pod: 3 Games
Play Rotating Pod: 4 Games
(these two form a division for the year)
Play Numher Pod: 2 Games

Play each team 1 time every 3 years and twice over 6 years. Might need to adjust some of the alignments as it is brutal for some.. but I like it!

I select A, I like the four year cycle if it gets me to Lexington every four years. Most beautiful area in the SEC